Ze Values? HELP

[davesparks]

well all i can say is the onsite guide should write it as 0.80, thanks tho that makes alot more sense than the regs

Why should the write it as. 0.80 if they mean 0.8? The numerical value is the same but the implied accuracy is not, 0.80 implies greater accuracy than value than 0.8

 

[shanky887614]

with maths like that, you'll never make a scouse wheel thief. you'd nick1 and say it was more than 4!

0.15 is not higher than 0.80 if you look at it that way

fart?..... follow through, more like.

Thats 1 big brain fart....

i think the op is overpaid rather than his namesake

 

[shanky887614]

Stop making out that scousers are thick

no need, you scousers don't need a helping hand to prove that to the rest of us

 

[newtothis]

0.80 implies greater accuracy than value than 0.8

Could it be that it was 0.8 exactly, with the zero dropped as it would be irrelevant, to the outcome calcs.
Sorry I'm trying to get my head around this, not disrespecting your post.

 

[7029 dave]

am new to testing so am sure i will make mistake, thats why i joined this site to get help from experienced electricians not to be bullied

Welcome along, you will find this site extremely useful, just banter nothing else enjoy it.

 

[davesparks]

Could it be that it was 0.8 exactly, with the zero dropped as it would be irrelevant, to the outcome calcs.
Sorry I'm trying to get my head around this, not disrespecting your post.

The zero is relevant to the outcome of the calculation as it will have an impact on its accuracy.
0.8 x 0.320 = 0.3
0.80 x 0.320 = 0.26
0.800 x 0.320 = 0.256

0.8 is a value anywhere between 0.75 and 0.84 wheras 0.80 is a value between 0.795 and 0.804

 

[PEG]

The zero is relevant to the outcome of the calculation as it will have an impact on its accuracy.
0.8 x 0.320 = 0.3
0.80 x 0.320 = 0.26
0.800 x 0.320 = 0.256

0.8 is a value anywhere between 0.75 and 0.84 wheras 0.80 is a value between 0.795 and 0.804

...Your calculator needs re-calibrating...:icon12:

 

[davesparks]

...Your calculator needs re-calibrating...:icon12:

ok, so this is the second version of my reply after noticing the wink at the end of that, this version being far more polite

 

[Paul.M]

Could it be that it was 0.8 exactly, with the zero dropped as it would be irrelevant, to the outcome calcs.
Sorry I'm trying to get my head around this, not disrespecting your post.

Yes mate. If the 2nd, 3rd 4th etc decimal place is not required, dont need to use it or it would become 0.800000 or 0.8 X 10 to the power of minus 6 (level 3 maths, you will see)

^^ that is correct isn't it gents? Been a long time since writing this form of equation and it does not look right?

 

[Des 56]

This is getting too in depth,anyone know if my maths are right,I seem to keep getting e=mc squared